We decided to opt for the BT broadband next month.

After an initial online enquiry we received this summary:

"Our initial test on your line indicates that you may be able to
have BT Broadband with download speeds up to 512Kbps,
which is up to 10 times faster than dial-up. At the moment,
your telephone line is unable to support our 2Mb speed
broadband package. Also, due to the length of your line,
an engineer visit may be required to set up your broadband
service."

We knew about the speed limit after making enquiries with
Pipex but didn't see any point in paying so much per month
for such a reduced service (and of course Pipex just blamed BT).

Well we don't think that we should pay BT's full monthly charge
(and if we use them they can't pass the buck). Ok, so we live in
the sticks but we can't get a full service because _their_ equipment
can't cope and it seems to me that whatever problems we might
have with any other ISP, they are also going to blame BT.

Has anyone experienced the same problem and if so have you
managed to reduce the BT monthly broadband supply price?

Cheers. Lisa

PL <lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk> wrote:
Haha.

BT wholesale have one price they charge the ISPs.
It does not vary per speed. (any more, for 99% of ISPs).

Asking for reductions is very unlikely to get any results.

ADSL is deployed over cables that were often put in the ground when
'high speed data' might mean telex, if you were lucky.

In many cases, it's a miracle it works at all.

"PL" <lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BFF71AB2.23DE2%lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk...
Been on btbroadband for three years , i can say i've never had any problems
what so ever.
Might be a bit more expensive than others , but i've never had a dissconnect
or not been able to collect my e-mail.
Over one thousand days of top dollar service.

Thus spaketh PL:

Of course Pipex blamed BT, it is afterall BTs infrastructure, who else could
they blame? Same as any other ISP you want to use that will be using a BT
Wholesale service.

Funny KAD wrote:

Kind regards

Wab

"PL" <lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BFF71AB2.23DE2%lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk...
Probably virtually no chance of getting reduced price with BT (or more
properly BT Yahoo!)
You are charged for bandwidth usage / limit rather than speed and according
to which BT Yahoo! extras you get

Have you seen the option comparisons for BT?
http://tinyurl.com/8dhjb

Nicola

"Funny KAD" <flim@flam.twat> wrote in message
news:dqrtth$i7t$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Erm ... BT have been illegally obstructing the LLU roll out for years and
now we find out there are areas that dont even have 2mb? This is
disgusting - not an excuse to flame someone :P

In general, if they tell you that the line is at 512K, because of where you
are situated, don't argue with it. There have been trials to try and make a
512K line faster and the effect has been detrimental. Once your line can be
supported to give higher speeds, this will happen over time.

Most people started with a 512K package and their line just gets upgraded
automatically once technology advances / more work is done at that exchange.

If you wish for things to be looked at specifically for yourself, then it
will be expensive.

I know where you're coming from in thinking that a 512K line would imply
that you are losing out compared to someone getting a 1Mb line for example.
However, these days its not really that true anymore. Anything 2Mb and
under pretty much fall into the same price band or are only at most a quid
in cost difference. The prices usually reflect the possible and likely
usage of the service than the actual line speed.

I would say that the only major detrimental effect that you might experience
is if you do realtime chatting - Skype and all that - where a 1Mb line or
more does reduce latency and breaking up of the conversation over long
distances. Of course, downloads will take longer etc, but its not that big
an issue unless you are a constant downloader.

AMO

It is simply a matter of physics. The longer the line the more the signal
degrades. Until more advanced technology is introduced no ISP using BT lines
will be able to offer a higher speed. You have no chance of getting a
reduced price from BT. Having said that there are plenty of ISPS that are
cheaper and better than BT.
Peter Crosland

"Funny KAD" <flim@flam.twat> wrote in message
news:dqrtth$i7t$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Zen do lower speeds:

256 = £15.31 +VAT
500 = £21.27 +VAT
1000 = £25.52+VAT
2000 = £29.78+VAT

Not cheap but excellent service with no caps or traffic shaping, just
download as much as you like all the time any time.

http://www.zenbroadband.com/adsl.aspx

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 07:14:49 -0000, "Gutz" <none@none.com> wrote:

The collapse of the telecom industry around 2001-02 also had a lot to
do with the slow take-up of LLU. The TSR settlement that created
Openreach is intended to kick-start the LLU sector in more equitable
market conditions.

William

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:28:53 UTC, "Nicola Redwood"
<nicolaexternal-newsgroups@yahoo.com> wrote:

Please don't perpetuate the misconception that bandwidth is something to
do with data volume. The speed and bandwidth are both 512Mbit/second,
effectively. Bandwidth is the data transfer capability of a line, not
the amount you're allowed to download.

--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]

PL wrote:
You should look for an ISP that sells a lower cost 512k data rate
service, as opposed to a 2Mb-same-price service. that will allow you a
saving based on your (potentially) reduced data consumption. Likewise
there is no point in having a service of '300GB per month' because
you'll never get over 150GB per month running 512kb 24/7. A fairly
academic point I'll admit, but that is the basis of the post regarding
Zen.

Bill

Bob Eager <rde42@spamcop.net> wrote on 21 Jan 2006 11:49:24 GMT:
However your average bandwidth usage over a month is proportional to
the amount of data transferred during that month.

--
David Taylor

bill wrote:

Any special reason why ?

Unfortunately, you'll find that since most ISPs buy service from
BT, and the speed available is based on line length, plus various
other aspects contributing to the signal quality for the line, the
common denominator is going to be the line, and BT equipment which
will support you in your location... So while you see it as being
a reduced service, you should count yourself lucky it is available
(a friend of mine in on part of Los Angeles was too far for DSL to
work, but had the option of cable... where I am - N. Wales - cable
is not available - but we are at least able to switch from dial-up
and while some might have 8000 kbps, even 500 kbps will be quite a
bonus when you get it!)

To be frank, sounds like you are far too pessimistic about getting it
to work. You should be able to get satisfaction from whichever ISP,
and they will (with perhaps a few exceptions) chase BT Wholesale to
ensure you get the service you're paying for. Paying BT for ADSL,
on the basis they should get it sorted more easily might mean you
are just paying over the odds, and get no actual benefit. Moaning
that service is bad because of BT equipment gets limited sympathy,
at least from me, because you have to weigh up benefits of where
you live against availability of services... and (to an extent)
you might prefer staying where you are so should complain less
about the downsides that come with it - a lack of mains gas,
sewerage, or choices of supermarkets, etc, might also affect
you but we cannot all get the same access to every service, and
broadband is no exception.

Good for a laugh. I've seen comments about someone whose line will
never offer 2000 kbps feeling 'hard done by' before, but doubt you
will get very far with this, sorry!

NDO and a few others offer services which are quite a bit cheaper on
lower speeds than 2000 kbps. Certainly worthwhile for Lisa to look
further afield than BT Broadband, and I believe she can find great
service with some of the cheaper competitors, though she might be
still feeling that BTB will get priority from BT Wholesale if it
gives her a problem... In 4 years, I've had no major problems,
but also never been using BT Internet/BT Yahoo or any other of
the BT-branded ISPs. Peter M.

(Lisa - do check http://www.ndo.com/adsl.html for pricing)

On 21 Jan 2006 11:49:24 GMT, "Bob Eager" <rde42@spamcop.net> wrote:

wow !

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices, see
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist...&Board=tiscali

AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:37:06 UTC, Phil Thompson
<phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote:

Oops...you know, it *felt* wrong when I typed that, but I still couldn't
see it!

(512Kbit/sec of course)

--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:54:42 +0000, PL wrote:

Fine, just back pay them the costs for providing a telephone line to your
rural address so us in the cities can be refunded for subsidising you.

<steve@nospam.invalid> wrote:
See my last post:

"One poster from another group said that he lives in a city and can still
only receive the 512Kbps download speed."

Lisa

"PL" <lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BFF8856D.23F78%lisa@dial.pipex.co.uk...
But they are still getting telephoney service which is all that BT's
network was opriginally designed for & all that they are oblidged to
provide. Anything alse is a plus.